Congress Calls Demography Panel’s Alleged Religion Wise Data Exercise ‘Diabolical Agenda’

NEW DELHI, Sept 29: The Congress on Tuesday questioned the purpose of a Home Ministry-led panel examining demographic changes, alleging that its reported demand for religion wise data reflects a “patently diabolical agenda”.

Congress general secretary in-charge of communications Jairam Ramesh shared a report published by The Hindu on social media, which said the High Level Committee on Demographic Changes had asked states to provide a range of information classified by religion.

According to the report, the committee has sought data covering the past 15 years on births and vehicle registrations, school enrolment and property transactions. It has also reportedly requested district-level information on religious structures and instances of what it described as unusual increases in registrations for Aadhaar, voter identity cards and ration cards.

The panel has additionally sought intelligence assessments and reports of commissions concerning alleged religious conversions among Scheduled Tribe communities, along with information about detention centres currently in operation, the report said.

Reacting to the reported questionnaire, Ramesh alleged that the committee had approached the issue with preconceived assumptions.

“This panel has a ‘patently diabolical agenda’ and has clearly articulated pre-conceived biases,” he said in a post on X.

Ramesh further claimed that the panel’s report may already have been prepared.

The controversy centres on the nature of the information sought by the committee and whether government departments maintain the requested data in the form being sought. The The Hindu report said several state governments have been unable to respond to many of the questions because departments do not routinely maintain information on a religion-wise basis.

The reported request spans several areas of public administration, including demographic records, education, transport, property transactions and identity-document registrations. Bringing these datasets together would require information from multiple departments and, in some cases, records that may not have traditionally been categorised according to religious identity.

The committee’s reported interest in demographic patterns also includes information relating to religious institutions and conversion among tribal communities. Such subjects can involve multiple administrative and legal records, depending on the state and the department concerned.

The Congress has raised concerns specifically over the reported use of religion as a classification for examining changes in population and other indicators. Ramesh’s comments suggest that the party views the exercise as evidence of an approach it believes is based on predetermined assumptions rather than neutral demographic analysis.

The media report, however, said state authorities were facing practical difficulties in supplying several categories of information requested by the panel. Government departments generally maintain records according to the administrative purpose for which they are collected, meaning that comparable religion-wise figures may not be available across all categories.

The reported questionnaire has therefore brought both the political implications and the data-collection process under scrutiny. While demographic studies can draw on information from a wide range of government records, the way such information is classified and interpreted can influence the conclusions reached.

The Congress has not only criticised the reported data requirements but also questioned the panel’s broader objectives. Ramesh’s assertion that its conclusions may already have been determined amounts to a political allegation; the available report cited by him does not by itself establish that the committee’s final findings have been predetermined.

The issue comes amid continuing political debate over population trends, migration, religious demographics and the collection of official population data. The committee’s reported request for information from states has added another dimension to those discussions by seeking details from areas ranging from civil registrations and education to property and identity documents.

For state governments, responding to the exercise could require coordination among departments that maintain separate databases and follow different recording practices. The reported absence of religion-wise information for some categories could also limit the ability of states to provide complete responses in the format requested.

The committee’s eventual findings will determine how the information gathered from different states is interpreted and what conclusions are drawn about demographic changes. Until then, the allegations surrounding its reported questionnaire remain a matter of political dispute.

The Congress has demanded scrutiny of what it describes as the panel’s stated biases, while the reported data requests have highlighted the practical challenges involved in compiling long-term, religion wise information across multiple sectors of government.

As the exercise progresses, attention is likely to remain focused on the committee’s methodology, the sources of the data it receives and how demographic indicators are ultimately analysed and presented.